↓ Skip to main content

Behavioral Oscillations in Visual Attention Modulated by Task Difficulty

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
32 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Behavioral Oscillations in Visual Attention Modulated by Task Difficulty
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01630
Pubmed ID
Authors

Airui Chen, Aijun Wang, Tianqi Wang, Xiaoyu Tang, Ming Zhang

Abstract

The spotlight of attention is full of discrete moments and operates periodically. Recently, it has been well-documented there were behavioral oscillations in visual attention, however, different periodicities were demonstrated. Task difficulty may be an important factor causing disagreement in attentional periodic patterns. The present study examined behavioral oscillations in visual attention during difficult and easy tasks. A modified high temporal resolution cue-target paradigm in which the cue-target stimulus onset asynchrony (SOAs) varied from 0.1 to 1.08 s in steps of 20 ms was used. The target was detected with the accuracy of 65% in the difficult condition and 75% in the easy condition. Oscillatory patterns were analyzed and observed in behavioral performance. A theta rhythm was visible in the difficult version. However, attention oscillation increased to a higher frequency in the easy version. Task difficulty was negatively related to power for all bands. Our findings suggest that the attention spotlight switched faster when the task was easy, while, it switched much more slowly when the task was difficult in order to obtain more information. A flexible mechanism for attention spotlight was demonstrated, and task demand modulated attention oscillations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 61 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 25%
Student > Bachelor 8 13%
Student > Master 7 11%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 7%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 15 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 31%
Neuroscience 10 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 8%
Unspecified 1 2%
Linguistics 1 2%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 19 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 September 2017.
All research outputs
#15,478,452
of 23,001,641 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#18,931
of 30,230 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#200,543
of 320,397 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#446
of 588 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,001,641 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,230 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 320,397 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 588 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.